Talk:America's Book of Secrets

This page was proposed for deletion by Donaldd23 (talk · contribs) on 17 August 2023.

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Image for databox

The official image for the series is here: http://www.prometheusentertainment.com/uploads/1/3/1/1/13117488/8361166.jpg but I don't know how to get this to display at the top of the infobox. Ghostofnemo (talk) 07:00, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Ghostofnemo (talk) 02:11, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to page without content

Redirecting this page to the article List of programs broadcast by History (American TV network) leads to a page with no content related to this series. Additionally, it makes it appear the article still exists, but it becomes unreachable. If you think this article should be deleted, you should go through the appropriate deletion process. But why are some History programs worthy of articles while some are not? Could redirecting this article into oblivion have anything to do with politics? Ghostofnemo (talk) 13:07, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's the fifth most popular pay-to-download History series according to the article. That seems to make it a notable series. Ghostofnemo (talk) 13:11, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've added an additional reference calling it "one of the best conspiracy theory documentaries on Netflix". Ghostofnemo (talk) 13:31, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Latest attempt to delete article

I've added a reference showing that the program is rated in the 89.9th percentile in terms of documentary viewer demand by an advertising placement agency. This means it's more popular among documentary viewers than 89.9% of available documentaries. Based on this addition to the article, I'm going to remove the deletion notice. If you really feel this program is not notable, I suggest you discuss this with other Wikipedia editors to see what they think, maybe here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion Ghostofnemo (talk) 02:53, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ghostofnemo: Anyone, including you, can remove a WP:PROD for any reason, or even no reason at all, although that is discouraged. If you believe the page is notable then remove the tag, preferably with a detailed explanation; if other editors still disagree the page will be discussed at WP:AFD. 74.73.224.126 (talk) 02:59, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The notice posted on the article page said the article would be deleted after 7 days if no action was taken! Ghostofnemo (talk) 03:05, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ghostofnemo: That is correct, if no action was taken. Since you removed the WP:PROD unfortunately without the explanation suggested it can no longer be deleted except through WP:AFD, well baring unusual circumstances anyway. Please review and read the pages I've linked so you understand the procedures, than you. 74.73.224.126 (talk) 03:10, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My explanation is here on the article Talk page, at the top of this discussion. Where else should it go, in the article? Ghostofnemo (talk) 04:08, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ghostofnemo: Ideally you should have given it in your edit summary, you could have linked the talk section to leave a pointer, along with a concise rehash. Additionally, viewer demand is at best an imperfect and oblique indicator of notability, it would be far better to provide sources demonstrating the topic is likely to satisfy the criteria of the general notability guideline, even if those sources are not currently present in the article itself. 74.73.224.126 (talk) 13:07, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For a Wikipedia expert, I find it odd that you don't have an account. Ghostofnemo (talk) 04:09, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Registration is not mandatory, if it were I wouldn't edit. 74.73.224.126 (talk) 13:07, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]